upvote

points

by beanjuiceII5 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby synergy203 hours ago|
next
[-]
The "Rust Evangelism Strike Force" is so annoying and it becomes the major reason I don't want to have anything to do with the language, yes I know it's strange.

Almost all HN software related discussion will have some Rust folks saying 'yeah I have a rust project for that', or 'just write this in rust and it will be better', so annoying after seeing those each time, it's like the house-window sales guy keeps knocking my door every day and never goes away.

reply
upvoteby quotemstr4 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Rust people: it's wrong to use a language that lacks memory safety and modern developer affordances. Do you really want to spend time debugging crashes and foist security problems on your users?

Me: You're right. Java has come a long way. Let's download...

Rust: No! No no on. Not like that!

---

Memory safety is a worthwhile goal, but combining it with manual memory management is wrong for most tasks. Just use a damn GC. Rust's safety-plus-malloc niche should be much smaller than it is.

reply
upvoteby AlotOfReading2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
If you're manually calling malloc in Rust, your code is almost certainly wrong. It might be called as an implementation detail when you create new objects, but std can generally be used as if it were managed automatically.
reply
upvoteby tjoff3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
GC is such a mistake though, you don't have to use rust but to never have to think about memory is a disservice to the programmer. Because that is something you always should do, and if you do then GC is nothing but a hindrance.

For scripting etc. it is perfect though.

reply
upvoteby wild_egg2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Why does having. GC mean not thinking about memory? I think about memory constantly in GC languages because I still want it to perform well.

The biggest difference is the failure modes. If I'm not thinking about memory, my RSS is higher or a bit of extra CPU time goes to GC. Both of those are radically better than UAF or buffer overruns. Good trade IMO.

reply
upvoteby rsyring2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
For a lot of programming tasks, HAVING to think about memory is a disservice.

That's part of the reason why Python, go, Ruby, etc. are so popular.

There is no one right answer, it's very dependent on what's being built and where the ROI for the programming effort comes from.

reply
upvoteby darig5 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
[dead]
reply